| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 都市計劃研究所 === 101 === In order to cooperate with 2010 Taipei International Flora Exposition and accelerate the competitiveness of the city to achieve the purpose of urban regeneration, Taipei City Government has launched the Taipei Beautiful Project and other related green life policy to enhance the urban landscape.
Taipei Beautiful Series II has been widely discussed and has become a controversial part of the whole project as the developers and landowners are able to receive Floor Area Incentive provided by the government through temporarily implanting the green. The government is trying to focus on the issues like cultivating the concepts of the ecology and sustainability and building up the public sphere to rationalize the property-led regeneration through short-term community participation.
In respond to the government policy, my first concern of the research is to understand how the temporary participation is formed in the case of eighteen-month-period project. Second, how can the issues such as “ Sustainability ”and“ Public ” facilitate the promotion of the Urban Regeneration policy through community participation. Third, the concealed problems of the Urban Regeneration Policy as a result of the temporarily community participation in building the green spaces in exchange for the floor incentive.
The method included qualitative interviews and literature analysis for exploring the relationship between the Urban Regeneration policy and the community participation. The conclusions exhibited that; First, the government claimed that it is essential to build up a bottom-up participation and involve the community participation. It also illustrates the “green spaces” is in accordance with the general need of the residence. However, according to the further investigation, whoever executed the policy remains top-down elite participation. Second, in order to create room for issues over a short period of time, the images of ecology and sustainability conveying through activity participation, have become spurious and false. Third, based on the study of the research, it can be concluded that the government mainly focuses on a symbolic participation. It arouse the citizens’ enthusiasm in participating the environment improvement in exchange for the floor area incentive to sugarcoat the property-led regeneration. As a result, it has distorted the good intention of participants.
|
|---|
